Conditional multinomial logit (MNL) models are often used to estimate the value of nonmarket resources under the assumption that consumer choices will be realized with certainty. The conditional MNL may not be appropriate when choices made may not be realized with certainty, such as when rationing mechanisms are used as a means of managing nonmarket resources. Two models that address this issue, developed by Boxall (1995) and Rouwendal (1989), are compared here to estimate welfare measures for moose hunting in Newfoundland. The results from these two models differ significantly from the results of a simple conditional MNL model . Les modèles logit multinomiaux conditionnels (MNL) sont souvent utiliés pour calculer la valeur de ressources non marchandes, dans une hypothèse de départ voulant que les choir du consommateur sont assurés d'être réalisés. Ce genre de modèle peut toutefois ne pas convenir lorsque les choix fait ne sont pas assurés d'être pleinement réalisés, comme dans les cas où des mécanismes de rationnement sont imposés comme moyen de gérer ces ressources non marchandes. Nous comparons deux modèles conçus et mis au point, l'un par Boxall (1995), l'autre par Rouwendal (1989), pour estimer les mesures des effets socio-économiques d'une réglementation de la chasse de l'orignal a Terre-Neuve. Il apparaêt que ces deux modèles aboutissent à des résultats significativement différents de ceux obtenus par un modèle MNL conditionnet simple .

Current non-market valuation techniques have been developed based on assumptions about values held within the Eurocentred culture. Contentions between cultures over natural resources are hypothesized to occur because of differences in held values resulting in different values being assigned to the resources in question. This study measured the held values of an Aboriginal band in Northern Saskatchewan as the first dimension of a non-market valuation study of natural resources. These held value structures are presented noting differences by age and gender and in comparison with the local Non-Aboriginal community and another Aboriginal group in northern Alberta.

• This article is based on joint research of all authors listed. Senior authorship is not assigned. Authors are listed in alphabetical order and are all with the Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. Funding from the Canada-Saskatchewan Partnership Agreement in Forestry is gratefully acknowledged. The research assistance of D. MacAuley and D. Dosman in the early stages of this project is also acknowledged.

Increasing recognition of the consequences of deforestation, together with a greater awareness of unpriced factors such as recreation, wildlife and other environmental values, has demanded a re-examination of public forest policies. Simultaneously, economic analysis continues to provide insight into the need to assess such policies to enhance forest resource use and income levels and distributions. These issues have been brought together in this book which examines both theoretical and empirical aspects of the forest economy and the environment. The book is divided into four parts. The first focuses on developing countries, with case studies from Malawi, Nepal, Costa Rica and Malaysia. Part II examines policy options and Part III impacts on the environment, while the final section looks at dynamic issues in resource allocation. Authors from the US, Canada, UK and Sweden examine topical issues and the book is aimed at advance students and research workers in ecological and environmental economics, as well as forestry economics and policy.

There is a conflict between private landowners' rights and public wildlife rights in Alberta. This conflict is expressed in the reduction or removal of wildlife habitat for agricultural purposes on private lands in Alberta. The landowners' decisions to alter habitat may not reflect society's value on the displaced wildlife. Factors that affect habitat change on private lands within the agricultural regions of Alberta were investigated. Survey respondents chose more often to alter wildlife habitat that was situated on irrigated cultivation than wildlife habitat that was situated on dryland cultivation. Survey respondents chose more often to preserve voluntarily a woodlot than a sligh, without enroling in any preservation program. Survey respondents' age, proportion of land enroled in a preservation program, land use interaction beliefs, net household income, economic outlook, personal value of wildlife, belied in the effectiveness of compensation, risk acceptance, and belief in the economic value of wildlife, belief in the effectiveness of compensation, risk acceptance, and belief in the economic value of wildlife all significantly affect either their decision to alter or preserve wildlife habitat or their choice of wildlife habitat preservation program. The survey results were, in part, analyzed using a random utility model applied through the use of a multi-nomial logit analysis. The above factors were analyzed and incentive compatible mechanisms that are, or may be, used to attain social welfare wildlife goals were investigated. The two msot acceptable land use options for dryland cultivation were lease for wildlife management and contract for joint agriculture-wildlife management. The two most acceptable land use options for irrigated cultivation were contract for joint agriculture-wildlife management and alter wildlife habitat for agricultural purposes. The two least acceptable land use options for private land were sale and donation for wildlife management. The combination of landoner attributes, current and potential land use, and wildlife habitat preservation program attributes will determine the sucecss of preservation efforts. Landowners must believe that they would be no worse off by preserving their land for wildlife habitat. This belief may be affected by the availability of both financial and non-financial incentives to preserve wildlife habitat.